Re: [PATCH v4 15/20] KVM: arm64: GICv4.1: Add direct injection capability to SGI registers

From: Marc Zyngier
Date: Tue Feb 18 2020 - 04:41:26 EST

On 2020-02-18 08:46, Zenghui Yu wrote:
Hi Marc,

On 2020/2/14 22:57, Marc Zyngier wrote:
Most of the GICv3 emulation code that deals with SGIs now has to be
aware of the v4.1 capabilities in order to benefit from it.

Add such support, keyed on the interrupt having the hw flag set and
being a SGI.

Signed-off-by: Marc Zyngier <maz@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-mmio-v3.c | 15 +++++-
virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-mmio.c | 88 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--
2 files changed, 96 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)

diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-mmio-v3.c b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-mmio-v3.c
index ebc218840fc2..de89da76a379 100644
--- a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-mmio-v3.c
+++ b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-mmio-v3.c
@@ -6,6 +6,7 @@
#include <linux/irqchip/arm-gic-v3.h>
#include <linux/kvm.h>
#include <linux/kvm_host.h>
+#include <linux/interrupt.h>
#include <kvm/iodev.h>
#include <kvm/arm_vgic.h>
@@ -942,8 +943,18 @@ void vgic_v3_dispatch_sgi(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, u64 reg, bool allow_group1)
* generate interrupts of either group.
*/
if (!irq->group || allow_group1) {
- irq->pending_latch = true;
- vgic_queue_irq_unlock(vcpu->kvm, irq, flags);
+ if (!irq->hw) {
+ irq->pending_latch = true;
+ vgic_queue_irq_unlock(vcpu->kvm, irq, flags);
+ } else {
+ /* HW SGI? Ask the GIC to inject it */
+ int err;
+ err = irq_set_irqchip_state(irq->host_irq,
+ IRQCHIP_STATE_PENDING,
+ true);
+ WARN_RATELIMIT(err, "IRQ %d", irq->host_irq);
+ raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&irq->irq_lock, flags);
+ }
} else {
raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&irq->irq_lock, flags);
}
diff --git a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-mmio.c b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-mmio.c
index d656ebd5f9d4..0a1fb61e5b89 100644
--- a/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-mmio.c
+++ b/virt/kvm/arm/vgic/vgic-mmio.c
@@ -5,6 +5,8 @@
#include <linux/bitops.h>
#include <linux/bsearch.h>
+#include <linux/interrupt.h>
+#include <linux/irq.h>
#include <linux/kvm.h>
#include <linux/kvm_host.h>
#include <kvm/iodev.h>
@@ -59,6 +61,11 @@ unsigned long vgic_mmio_read_group(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
return value;
}
+static void vgic_update_vsgi(struct vgic_irq *irq)
+{
+ WARN_ON(its_prop_update_vsgi(irq->host_irq, irq->priority, irq->group));
+}
+
void vgic_mmio_write_group(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, gpa_t addr,
unsigned int len, unsigned long val)
{
@@ -71,7 +78,12 @@ void vgic_mmio_write_group(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu, gpa_t addr,
raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&irq->irq_lock, flags);
irq->group = !!(val & BIT(i));
- vgic_queue_irq_unlock(vcpu->kvm, irq, flags);
+ if (irq->hw && vgic_irq_is_sgi(irq->intid)) {
+ vgic_update_vsgi(irq);
+ raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&irq->irq_lock, flags);
+ } else {
+ vgic_queue_irq_unlock(vcpu->kvm, irq, flags);
+ }
vgic_put_irq(vcpu->kvm, irq);
}
@@ -113,7 +125,21 @@ void vgic_mmio_write_senable(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
struct vgic_irq *irq = vgic_get_irq(vcpu->kvm, vcpu, intid + i);
raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&irq->irq_lock, flags);
- if (vgic_irq_is_mapped_level(irq)) {
+ if (irq->hw && vgic_irq_is_sgi(irq->intid)) {
+ if (!irq->enabled) {
+ struct irq_data *data;
+
+ irq->enabled = true;
+ data = &irq_to_desc(irq->host_irq)->irq_data;
+ while (irqd_irq_disabled(data))
+ enable_irq(irq->host_irq);
+ }
+
+ raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&irq->irq_lock, flags);
+ vgic_put_irq(vcpu->kvm, irq);
+
+ continue;
+ } else if (vgic_irq_is_mapped_level(irq)) {
bool was_high = irq->line_level;
/*
@@ -148,6 +174,8 @@ void vgic_mmio_write_cenable(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
struct vgic_irq *irq = vgic_get_irq(vcpu->kvm, vcpu, intid + i);
raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&irq->irq_lock, flags);
+ if (irq->hw && vgic_irq_is_sgi(irq->intid) && irq->enabled)
+ disable_irq_nosync(irq->host_irq);
irq->enabled = false;
@@ -167,10 +195,22 @@ unsigned long vgic_mmio_read_pending(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
for (i = 0; i < len * 8; i++) {
struct vgic_irq *irq = vgic_get_irq(vcpu->kvm, vcpu, intid + i);
unsigned long flags;
+ bool val;
raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&irq->irq_lock, flags);
- if (irq_is_pending(irq))
- value |= (1U << i);
+ if (irq->hw && vgic_irq_is_sgi(irq->intid)) {
+ int err;
+
+ val = false;
+ err = irq_get_irqchip_state(irq->host_irq,
+ IRQCHIP_STATE_PENDING,
+ &val);
+ WARN_RATELIMIT(err, "IRQ %d", irq->host_irq);
+ } else {
+ val = irq_is_pending(irq);
+ }
+
+ value |= ((u32)val << i);
raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&irq->irq_lock, flags);
vgic_put_irq(vcpu->kvm, irq);
@@ -227,6 +267,21 @@ void vgic_mmio_write_spending(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
}
raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&irq->irq_lock, flags);
+
+ if (irq->hw && vgic_irq_is_sgi(irq->intid)) {
+ /* HW SGI? Ask the GIC to inject it */
+ int err;
+ err = irq_set_irqchip_state(irq->host_irq,
+ IRQCHIP_STATE_PENDING,
+ true);
+ WARN_RATELIMIT(err, "IRQ %d", irq->host_irq);
+
+ raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore(&irq->irq_lock, flags);
+ vgic_put_irq(vcpu->kvm, irq);
+
+ continue;
+ }
+
if (irq->hw)
vgic_hw_irq_spending(vcpu, irq, is_uaccess);
else

Should we consider taking the GICv4.1 support into uaccess_{read/write}
callbacks for GICR_ISPENDR0 so that userspace can properly save/restore
the pending state of GICv4.1 vSGIs?

I *think* we can do it because on restoration, GICD_CTLR(.nASSGIreq) is
restored before GICR_ISPENDR0. So we know whether we're restoring
pending for vSGIs, and we can restore it to the HW level if v4.1 is
supported by GIC. Otherwise restore it by the normal way.

And saving is easy with the get_irqchip_state callback, right?

Yes, this should be pretty easy to do, but I haven't completely worked out
the ordering dependencies (you're way ahead of me here!).

There is still a chance that userspace will play with us trying to set and
reset nASSGIreq, so we need to define what is acceptable...


@@ -281,6 +336,20 @@ void vgic_mmio_write_cpending(struct kvm_vcpu *vcpu,
raw_spin_lock_irqsave(&irq->irq_lock, flags);
+ if (irq->hw && vgic_irq_is_sgi(irq->intid)) {
+ /* HW SGI? Ask the GIC to inject it */

"Ask the GIC to clear its pending state" :-)

One day, I'll ban copy/paste from my editor... ;-)

M.
--
Jazz is not dead. It just smells funny...